A Framework For Institutionalizing Indigenous Knowledge Systems In Dispute Resolution Mechanism Among The Maasai Community In Kajiado County, Kenya

Abstract

Disputes and conflicts are ubiquitous occurrences with both negative and positive effects on the social and economic development of societies. A huge number of cases are outstanding in the formal court systems despite the provision of alternate dispute resolution mechanisms. Owing to the presence of renowned indigenous dispute resolution mechanisms, there is a dearth in studies seeking to evaluate the positive contribution of the IDR mechanisms in dispute resolution among communities in Kenya. Therefore this study documented the indigenous dispute resolution mechanisms among the Maasai community and developed a framework in which IDR may be institutionalized and integrated into the formal dispute resolution mechanisms in Kajiado County, Kenya. The study had five–fold objectives: To investigate the existing utilization of indigenous knowledge in dispute resolution mechanisms among the Maasai community in Kajiado County, Kenya, evaluate the effectiveness of indigenous dispute resolution in relation to formal judicial mechanism in dispute resolution, analyse the role of non-state actors in influencing the use of IDR in dispute resolution mechanism, develop a framework for institutionalizing indigenous knowledge system in dispute resolution mechanisms and lastly to validate the developed framework. The study was anchored by three theories: The worldview theory, the frustration – aggression theory and the instrumentality theory. The study employed a mixed–method research design and the location of study was in Kajiado County, Kenya. The target population was 5,202 individuals who are 75 years and above including 171 NGAO leaders from four Sub-Counties in Kajiado County, Kenya. The sample size for the study was 371 individuals who were sampled using multi–stage sampling criteria and calculated using Yamane,(1967) formula. Data collection was done using the focus group discussion and questionnaires. The instruments were validated by piloting and reviewed by a panel of experts. Qualitative data was collected and analysed through thematic and narrative analysis while quantitative data was analysed descriptively. The study established that there is need to institutionalize a framework for indigenous dispute resolution into the formal dispute resolution mechanisms which should observe three main attributes: Legal recognition, capacity building and systematic documentation to enhance legitimacy, efficiency and sustainability.Therefore justice in plural societies is best shown through advanced hybridized frameworks that integrate cultural legitimacy from indigenous dispute resolutions with established enforceability from formal judicial mechanisms.The study recommended: There is need for legal recognition of IDRs, enhanced capa